But the Twitter's employee's comments—that the public will generally not accept banning Republican politicians as a trade-off to eradicating white supremacy—touches on something broader: do societal norms play a greater role than some may acknowledge?https://t.co/x6JRvdvJJGpic.twitter.com/uEiHStNhVg

the asymmetric nature of politics right now has scrambled brains of folks who adhere to a very rigid idea of both sides fairness and that confusion is the biggest thing that true grifters & bigots take advantage of to peddle half truths and propaganda https://t.co/xjORtcSXPk

The issue is that Twitter treats ISIS and white supremacist moderation in fundamentally different ways. Twitter bans ISIS like spam, automatically, at scale, aggressively, proactively. It doesn't with white supremacy; that would flag 'innocent' accounts https://t.co/x6JRvdvJJGpic.twitter.com/qC7Qh2pLow

jfc. Twitter won't treat white supremacist propaganda like ISIS propaganda because white supremacist rhetoric is so pervasive in right-wing circles that using an algorithm to detect it would also mean banning some GOP politicians from the platform.https://t.co/VKK0vvRkJB

I’ll say this: if what is reported here is not the reason why @Twitter has failed to sweep white supremacist content off of its platform the same way that it managed to rid itself of ISIS, then it owes us that explanation. https://t.co/FoNcb8yuTx

Very big scoop from @josephfcox + @jason_koebler: Twitter isn't going after white supremacist content online as it did ISIS, because Republican politicians would be caught up in bans by algorithms detecting hate speech https://t.co/UMVzSeX5MS

The issue is that Twitter treats ISIS and white supremacist moderation in fundamentally different ways. Twitter bans ISIS like spam, automatically, at scale, aggressively, proactively. It doesn't with white supremacy; that would flag 'innocent' accounts https://t.co/x6JRvdvJJGpic.twitter.com/qC7Qh2pLow

"Twitter hasn’t taken the same aggressive approach to white supremacist content [as with ISIS content] because the collateral accounts that are impacted can, in some instances, be Republican politicians." https://t.co/UXNQa9svnU

The headline on this article--that Twitter won't ban white supremacy because that would mean banning some Republican politicians--is important if unsurprising. But this part is actually more interesting. https://t.co/zw6t3VPU7Hpic.twitter.com/pKmIS1akRP

Twitter doesn't go after white nationalist content as aggressively as it did with ISIS because it would likely mean some Republicans' accounts would be flagged as well, Motherboard reportshttps://t.co/UIwDcs9200

"Twitter hasn’t taken the same aggressive approach to white supremacist content because the collateral accounts that are impacted can, in some instances, be Republican politicians." https://t.co/QX5WAHVtNn